Skip to content

Implementing Systematic Distress Screening in Breast Cancer

Implementing Systematic Distress Screening in Breast Cancer

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02941614
Enrollment
1436
Registered
2016-10-21
Start date
2017-10-02
Completion date
2019-11-30
Last updated
2020-07-07

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Breast Cancer

Brief summary

Many breast cancer patients experience psychological distress during their cancer care journey. There are effective treatments for breast cancer patients experiencing distress, such as individual or group therapy, health education, and medication. Unfortunately, clinicians may not be aware of the symptoms of distress in their breast cancer patients, and some breast cancer patients who could benefit from referral to behavioral health specialists are overlooked. New guidelines recommend that all cancer patients be regularly screened for distress. However, there are unanswered questions about the impact of distress screening conducted on a large scale. Few studies have evaluated the impact of distress screening on important outcomes in breast cancer patients, such as patient experience and use of health care services, as compared to the usual care offered by the health care organization. In addition, oncology clinicians may be uncertain about the benefits of large-scale distress screening, and pilot screening programs have not been uniformly successful particularly in the community oncology setting. The overarching goals of this study are to assess the effectiveness of implementing a guideline-recommended distress screening program for newly diagnosed breast cancer patients on improving identification and referral to treatment for highly distressed breast cancer patients, to assess patient-reported outcomes, health services utilization, and implementation outcomes of the program. This study will address two main research questions: 1) Evaluate the effectiveness of a guideline-recommended distress screening program for breast cancer patients in improving identification of distressed patients, initiation and completion of referrals to behavioral health, and patient-reported and utilization outcomes as compared to usual care; 2) Identify the barriers, facilitators, and other implementation-related outcomes related to distress screening in the community oncology setting. Please note: This study did not require a DSMB, as it falls under the exception for low-risk behavioral studies.

Detailed description

Background and Study Aims: Breast cancer patients are at risk for physical and psychosocial harms. Among the most highly prevalent psychosocial issues in breast cancer patients is psychological distress. Distress is defined and assessed as psychiatric morbidity or prevalence of psychiatric disorders, particularly anxiety and depression. It is estimated that 40-50% of women diagnosed with early stage breast cancer will experience distress in the year following diagnosis. There is a rich literature on the persistent negative effects of distress in breast cancer patients, including associations with decreased physical and social functioning, increased symptom burden, higher utilization of inpatient and emergency services, and poor quality of life. Psychological distress can also adversely affect individual work productivity, and contributes to the rising costs of cancer care. Recent guidelines from the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and others recommend routine distress screening for breast cancer patients, recognizing the availability of effective treatments for psychological distress. Unfortunately distress remains under-detected and undertreated in breast cancer patients and rates of adherence to ASCO and other guidelines is very low. Low rates of screening might be explained in part by limited evidence of effectiveness: while efficacy of distress screening has been demonstrated in small-scale trials at academic centers, typically showing increases in number of referrals to psychosocial services, evidence supporting the effectiveness of large scale distress screening programs under routine practice conditions is limited. It is currently unknown if distress screening of breast cancer patients will improve identification of distressed patients or referrals to behavioral health services in non-academic settings. In addition, extant efficacy studies generally fail to measure key impacts and outcomes desired from distress screening, such as patient-reported outcomes (e.g., distress management, satisfaction) and changes in health care utilization (e.g., changes in emergency department use). Implementation-related factors and outcomes have also been largely overlooked in prior research (e.g., clinician acceptability, fidelity of delivery), leaving serious gaps in the understanding of barriers to adoption of distress screening programs and gaps in the knowledge needed to facilitate large-scale, routine implementation of screening. The overarching goal of this study is to implement and evaluate a guideline-based distress screening program for newly diagnosed breast cancer patients, measuring its effectiveness and impacts on key outcomes and examining barriers and facilitators to routine adoption. There is a critical need for translational research to assess the effectiveness of distress screening programs in improving (a) identification of distress, (b) referral for services, (c) outcomes for breast cancer patients in real-world oncology settings, and in understanding implementation barriers and facilitators. Without evidence of effectiveness, it is unlikely that clinical and operational health system leaders will invest in distress screening programs, potentially leading to serious adverse consequences. This proposed translational research is crucial in order to bridge the gap between academic studies and non-academic, community oncology practice, where the majority of breast cancer patients are treated. In addition, gaining insight and understanding into barriers and facilitators to implementation of distress screening programs is critically important. The objectives are to assess the effectiveness of the recommended screening program from the joint task force of the American Psychosocial Oncology Society, Association of Oncology Social Work, and Oncology Nursing Society on improving identification and referral to treatment for highly distressed breast cancer patients within an integrated health care system, and to assess patient-reported outcomes, health services utilization, and implementation outcomes of the program. Specific Aims: Aim 1: Evaluate the effectiveness of a guideline-recommended distress screening program for breast cancer patients in improving identification of distressed patients, initiation and completion of referrals to behavioral health, and patient-reported and utilization outcomes as compared to usual care within Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC), using a pragmatic cluster randomized control trial design at six medical centers. Aim 2: Identify patient-, clinician-, and system-level barriers and facilitators to implementation of the program, and assess stakeholder-perceived acceptability, fidelity, and achievements of the program. Study Methods The setting for this research is Kaiser Permanente Southern California, a large, integrated health care system with 14 medical centers serving a highly diverse population of over 4 million members. The investigators will use a novel hybrid effectiveness-implementation study design that allows for dual study of the clinical effectiveness and implementation-related factors to address the need for evidence in both areas. This study will employ mixed methods, collecting both qualitative and quantitative data as appropriate to address the study aims. To evaluate effectiveness, this study will use a cluster randomized control trial (RCT) design, clustered at the medical center level, and will implement the program at the intervention sites and offering screening to all newly diagnosed breast cancer patients. To evaluate the effectiveness of the program, the investigators will collect structured data from the KPSC electronic record (referral initiation/completion, use of health services) and patient-reported data (functioning, symptom management). Existing work from a pilot primary care-based distress screening program will be leveraged for this research, demonstrating the feasibility of this study. Implementation outcomes will be assessed with qualitative and survey data. Knowledge gained from this research will be used to inform the continued development and implementation of systematic distress screening programs for breast cancer patients, and will enrich the evidence base by providing critical information on relevant patient- and system-level outcomes. These results will have an impact on the quality of life and quality of care for these patients, and will directly influence distress screening program adoption, scale-up, and spread, making this work highly relevant to breast cancer patients throughout California and across the nation.

Interventions

BEHAVIORALDistress screening

A brief depression and anxiety screening instrument, the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9), will be administered to newly diagnosed breast cancer patients in the Distress Screening arm.

Sponsors

California Breast Cancer Research Program
CollaboratorOTHER
Kaiser Permanente
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Observational model
OTHER
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Newly diagnosed with initial breast cancer, any stage, any histology type * Kaiser Permanente member for at least 100 days during study period

Exclusion criteria

* None

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of Participants Offered and Screened for DistressPatients assessed during initial consult - e.g. 1 day during 60 min consult\# of newly diagnosed breast cancer patients offered and screened with the Patient Health Questionnaire 9 at their initial consult
Number of Participants Offered an Appropriate ReferralPatients assessed during initial consult - e.g. 1 day during 60 min consultFor patients who had screening done in Oncology, appropriate action for those with a medium/high PHQ-9 is a referral to social work, psychiatry, depression care management.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Breast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom Checklist12 monthsSelf-reported measure of physical symptoms in the past 4 weeks; scale: 0=not at all; 1=slightly; 2=moderately; 3=quite a bit; 4=extremely. Higher scores indicate greater symptom burden. Sub-scales include Hot Flashes, Nausea, Bladder Control, Vaginal Problems, Musculoskelatal Pain, Cognitive Problems, Weight Problems, and Arm Problems.
Number of Patients With Primary Care Visit18 monthsBetween group comparison of number of visits to primary care. Restricted to patients with at least 100 days of follow-up. Covariates included in multivariable models were age, Charlson's comorbidity index, race/ethnicity, marital status, and cancer stage.
Number of Patients With Oncology Visit18 monthsBetween group comparison of number of visits to oncology. Restricted to patients with at least 100 days of follow-up. Covariates included in multivariable models were age, Charlson's comorbidity index, race/ethnicity, marital status, and cancer stage.
Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)12 monthsSelf-reported for physical well-being; social family well-being; emotional well-being; functional well-being; and additional concerns over the past 7 days; scale: 0=not at all; 1=a little bit; 2=somewhat; 3=quite a bit; 4=very much; responses indicate symptoms/concerns in the past 7 days. The higher the score, the better the outcome. To derive a FACT-B total score, score range 0-148. The subscales include: (1) Physical Well-Being, score range 0-28; (2) Social/Family Well-Being, score range 0-28; (3) Emotional Well-Being, score range 0-24; (4) Functional well-being, score range 0-28; (5) Breast Cancer Subscale, score range 0-40.

Other

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of Participants Utilizing Behavioral Health Services18 monthsBetween group comparison of number of visits with behavioral health providers. Restricted to patients with at least 100 days of follow-up. Covariates included in multivariable models were age, Charlson's comorbidity index, race/ethnicity, marital status, and cancer stage.
Number of Participants Utilizing Emergency and Urgent Care Services18 monthsBetween group comparison of number of visits to emergency and urgent care services. Restricted to patients with at least 100 days of follow-up. Covariates included in multivariable models were age, Charlson's comorbidity index, race/ethnicity, marital status, and cancer stage.

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Distress Screening
Newly diagnosed breast cancer patients will be offered a brief distress screening questionnaire, the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ), around the time of their breast cancer diagnosis and again at subsequent transitions in care as appropriate (e.g., the initiation of chemotherapy). Distress screening: A brief depression and anxiety screening instrument, the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ), will be administered to newly diagnosed breast cancer patients in the Distress Screening arm. The PHQ starts with a 2-item screen, and branches to the full screening instrument as needed.
744
No Screening
Newly diagnosed breast cancer patients will experience usual care.
692
Total1,436

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicDistress ScreeningNo ScreeningTotal
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
319 Participants311 Participants630 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
425 Participants381 Participants806 Participants
Age, Continuous61.1 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.35
62 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 13.34
61.5 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.84
Cancer Stage
Missing
37 Participants21 Participants58 Participants
Cancer Stage
Stage 0
32 Participants27 Participants59 Participants
Cancer Stage
Stage I
145 Participants106 Participants251 Participants
Cancer Stage
Stage II
236 Participants234 Participants470 Participants
Cancer Stage
Stage III
236 Participants219 Participants455 Participants
Cancer Stage
Stage IV
58 Participants85 Participants143 Participants
Charlson Comorbidity Score2.2 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.75
2.1 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.62
2.2 units on a scale
STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.69
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
204 Participants172 Participants376 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
483 Participants476 Participants959 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
57 Participants44 Participants101 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
5 Participants7 Participants12 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
151 Participants113 Participants264 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
106 Participants143 Participants249 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
2 Participants2 Participants4 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
6 Participants7 Participants13 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
73 Participants50 Participants123 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
401 Participants370 Participants771 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
744 Participants692 Participants1436 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
740 Participants689 Participants1429 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
4 Participants3 Participants7 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
25 / 74416 / 692
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 7440 / 692
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 7440 / 692

Outcome results

Primary

Number of Participants Offered an Appropriate Referral

For patients who had screening done in Oncology, appropriate action for those with a medium/high PHQ-9 is a referral to social work, psychiatry, depression care management.

Time frame: Patients assessed during initial consult - e.g. 1 day during 60 min consult

Population: Patients who completed PHQ-9 screening in Oncology with med/high score

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Distress ScreeningNumber of Participants Offered an Appropriate Referral51 Participants
No ScreeningNumber of Participants Offered an Appropriate Referral0 Participants
Primary

Number of Participants Offered and Screened for Distress

\# of newly diagnosed breast cancer patients offered and screened with the Patient Health Questionnaire 9 at their initial consult

Time frame: Patients assessed during initial consult - e.g. 1 day during 60 min consult

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Distress ScreeningNumber of Participants Offered and Screened for Distress596 Participants
No ScreeningNumber of Participants Offered and Screened for Distress3 Participants
Secondary

Breast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom Checklist

Self-reported measure of physical symptoms in the past 4 weeks; scale: 0=not at all; 1=slightly; 2=moderately; 3=quite a bit; 4=extremely. Higher scores indicate greater symptom burden. Sub-scales include Hot Flashes, Nausea, Bladder Control, Vaginal Problems, Musculoskelatal Pain, Cognitive Problems, Weight Problems, and Arm Problems.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Number of participants analyzed varies across rows for 3-, 6- and 12-month surveys because not all patients completed all surveys and/or answered all questions in a survey.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 6 month Vaginal/Sex Problems Sub-Scale0.7 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Suvey 3 month Bladder Control Sub-Scale0.6 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.9
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 6 month Musculoskeletal Pain Sub-Scale1.5 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.1
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 3 month Weight Problems Sub-Scale1.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 6 month Cognitive Problems Sub-Scale1.0 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 3 Month Total Score0.9 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.6
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 6 month Weight Problems Sub-Scale1.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.1
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 3 month Arm Problems Sub-Scale0.6 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.8
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 6 month Arm Problems Sub-Scale0.5 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.7
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 3 month Vaginal/Sex Problems Sub-Scale0.6 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 12 month Total Score0.9 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.6
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Suvey 6 month Total Score0.9 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.7
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 12 month Hot Flashes Sub-Scale1.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.1
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 3 month Nausea Sub-Scale0.4 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.7
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 12 month Nausea Sub-Scale0.2 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.4
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 6 month Hot Flashes Sub-Scale1.2 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.1
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 12 month Bladder Control Sub-Scale0.7 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.9
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 3 month Musculoskeletal Pain Sub-Scale1.5 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.1
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 12 month Vaginal/Sex Problem Sub-Scale0.8 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.1
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 12 month Musculoskeletal Pain Sub-Scal1.7 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.1
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 6 month Nausea Sub-Scale0.2 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.4
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 12 month Cognitive Problems Sub-Scale1.0 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 3 month Hot Flashes Sub-Scale1.2 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.1
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 12 month Weight Problems Sub-Scale1.0 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.1
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 6 month Bladder Control Sub-Scale0.7 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 12 month Arm Problems Sub-Scale0.5 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.8
Distress ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Suvey 3 month Cognitive Problems Sub-Scale1.2 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 12 month Arm Problems Sub-Scale0.5 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.7
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 3 Month Total Score1.0 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.7
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 3 month Hot Flashes Sub-Scale1.2 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.2
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 3 month Nausea Sub-Scale0.5 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.8
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Suvey 3 month Bladder Control Sub-Scale0.7 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 3 month Vaginal/Sex Problems Sub-Scale0.8 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.1
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 3 month Musculoskeletal Pain Sub-Scale1.5 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.1
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Suvey 3 month Cognitive Problems Sub-Scale1.2 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.1
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 3 month Weight Problems Sub-Scale1.2 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.2
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 3 month Arm Problems Sub-Scale0.5 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.9
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Suvey 6 month Total Score0.9 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.6
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 6 month Hot Flashes Sub-Scale1.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.2
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 6 month Nausea Sub-Scale0.3 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.5
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 6 month Bladder Control Sub-Scale0.6 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.9
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 6 month Vaginal/Sex Problems Sub-Scale0.8 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.1
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 6 month Musculoskeletal Pain Sub-Scale1.4 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.2
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 6 month Cognitive Problems Sub-Scale1.0 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 6 month Weight Problems Sub-Scale1.2 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.1
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 6 month Arm Problems Sub-Scale0.5 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.8
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 12 month Total Score0.9 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.6
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 12 month Hot Flashes Sub-Scale1.0 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.1
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 12 month Nausea Sub-Scale0.3 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.6
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 12 month Bladder Control Sub-Scale0.7 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.9
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 12 month Musculoskeletal Pain Sub-Scal1.5 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.1
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 12 month Cognitive Problems Sub-Scale1.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 12 month Weight Problems Sub-Scale1.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1
No ScreeningBreast Cancer Prevention Trial (BCPT) Symptom ChecklistBCPT Survey 12 month Vaginal/Sex Problem Sub-Scale0.9 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.2
Comparison: Data below is for the BCPT survey 3 month Total Score.p-value: 0.5995% CI: [-0.15, 0.09]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 6 month Total Scorep-value: 0.4795% CI: [-0.09, 0.19]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 12 month Total Scorep-value: 0.3795% CI: [-0.2, 0.07]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 3 month Hot Flashes Sub-Scalep-value: 0.6595% CI: [-0.26, 0.17]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 6 month Hot Flashes Sub-Scalep-value: 0.5495% CI: [-0.17, 0.33]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 12 month Hot Flashes Sub-Scalep-value: 0.8795% CI: [-0.27, 0.22]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 3 month Nausea Sub-Scalep-value: 0.3295% CI: [-0.17, 0.06]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 6 month Nausea Sub-Scalep-value: 0.9695% CI: [-0.15, 0.14]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 12 month Nausea Sub-Scalep-value: 0.3295% CI: [-0.21, 0.07]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 3 month Bladder Control Sub-Scalep-value: 0.4495% CI: [-0.24, 0.11]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 6 month Bladder Control Sub-Scalep-value: 0.3895% CI: [-0.11, 0.3]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is for the BCPT survey 12 month Bladder Control Sub-Scalep-value: 0.4795% CI: [-0.28, 0.13]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 3 month Vaginal Problems Sub-Scalep-value: 0.1395% CI: [-0.39, 0.05]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 6 month Vaginal Problems Sub-Scalep-value: 0.0395% CI: [-0.55, -0.02]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 12 month Vaginal Problems Sub-Scalep-value: 0.1495% CI: [-0.45, 0.06]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 3 month Musculoskeletal Pain Sub-Scalep-value: 0.5395% CI: [-0.14, 0.28]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 6 month Musculoskeletal Pain Sub-Scalep-value: 0.4795% CI: [-0.16, 0.35]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 12 month Musculoskeletal Pain Sub-Scalep-value: 0.5795% CI: [-0.18, 0.33]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 3 month Cognitive Problems Sub-Scalep-value: 0.8595% CI: [-0.18, 0.21]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 6 month Cognitive Problems Sub-Scalep-value: 0.3895% CI: [-0.12, 0.32]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 12 month Cognitive Problems Sub-Scalep-value: 0.2395% CI: [-0.35, 0.09]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 3 month Weight Problems Sub-Scalep-value: 0.1895% CI: [-0.35, 0.07]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 6 month Weight Problems Sub-Scalep-value: 0.3595% CI: [-0.36, 0.13]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 12 month Weight Problems Sub-Scalep-value: 0.3495% CI: [-0.36, 0.12]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 3 month Arm Problems Sub-Scalep-value: 0.2295% CI: [-0.06, 0.25]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 6 month Arm Problems Sub-Scalep-value: 0.2695% CI: [-0.08, 0.29]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is the BCPT survey 12 month Arm Problems Sub-Scalep-value: 0.3495% CI: [-0.09, 0.27]Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)

Self-reported for physical well-being; social family well-being; emotional well-being; functional well-being; and additional concerns over the past 7 days; scale: 0=not at all; 1=a little bit; 2=somewhat; 3=quite a bit; 4=very much; responses indicate symptoms/concerns in the past 7 days. The higher the score, the better the outcome. To derive a FACT-B total score, score range 0-148. The subscales include: (1) Physical Well-Being, score range 0-28; (2) Social/Family Well-Being, score range 0-28; (3) Emotional Well-Being, score range 0-24; (4) Functional well-being, score range 0-28; (5) Breast Cancer Subscale, score range 0-40.

Time frame: 12 months

Population: Patients who completed at least one survey item in Fact-B at the 3, 6 and/or 12 month survey. The number of participants analyzed for the total scores and sub-scale scores at 3-, 6- and 12 months varies, because not all patients responded to all surveys or answered all of the questions in a survey.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Distress ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 3-month Total Score104.5 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 22.1
Distress ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 3-month Physical Well-Being Subscale20.8 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.2
Distress ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 3 month Social/Family Well-Being Subscale21.2 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.2
Distress ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 3 month Emotional Well-Being Subscale18.3 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.3
Distress ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 3-month Functional Well-Being Subscale18.3 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.7
Distress ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 3-month Breast Cancer Subscale26.5 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.8
Distress ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 6 month Total Score108.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 22.3
Distress ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 6 month Physical Well-Being Subscale22.3 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 5.9
Distress ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 6 month Social/Family Well-Being Subscale20.5 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.2
Distress ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 6 month Emotional Well-Being Subscale18.5 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.3
Distress ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 6 month Functional Well-Being Subscale19.2 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.2
Distress ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 6 month Breast Cancer Subscale27.0 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.9
Distress ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 12 month Total Score109.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 22.9
Distress ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 12 month Physical Well-Being Subscale22.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 5.6
Distress ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 12 month Social/Family Well-Being Subscale20.7 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.1
Distress ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 12 month Emotional Subscale18.8 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.9
Distress ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 12 month Functional Well-Being19.9 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.3
Distress ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 12 month Breast Cancer Subscale27.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.9
No ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 12 month Physical Well-Being Subscale22.3 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 5.5
No ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 3-month Total Score104.6 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 23
No ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 6 month Emotional Well-Being Subscale18.0 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.4
No ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 3-month Physical Well-Being Subscale20.5 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.5
No ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 12 month Breast Cancer Subscale26.9 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.8
No ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 3 month Social/Family Well-Being Subscale21.4 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 5.8
No ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 6 month Functional Well-Being Subscale18.5 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.4
No ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 3 month Emotional Well-Being Subscale18.3 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.4
No ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 12 month Social/Family Well-Being Subscale20.9 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6
No ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 3-month Functional Well-Being Subscale18.1 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.6
No ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 6 month Breast Cancer Subscale25.8 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.5
No ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 3-month Breast Cancer Subscale26.4 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.9
No ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 12 month Functional Well-Being19.9 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 5.9
No ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 6 month Total Score105.3 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 21.9
No ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 12 month Total Score108.3 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 22.4
No ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 6 month Physical Well-Being Subscale21.9 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 5.4
No ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 12 month Emotional Subscale18.6 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.4
No ScreeningFunctional Assessment of Cancer Therapy, Breast Cancer (FACT-B)Fact-B 6 month Social/Family Well-Being Subscale21.3 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 5.3
Comparison: Data below is for FACT-B 3 month Total Scorep-value: 0.9295% CI: [-4.48, 4.05]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is for FACT-B 6 month Total Scorep-value: 0.5795% CI: [-3.41, 6.15]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is for the Fact-B 12 month Total Scorep-value: 0.6295% CI: [-3.54, 5.89]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is for the Fact-B 3 month Physical Well-Being Subscalep-value: 0.8395% CI: [-0.99, 1.23]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: Data below is for the Fact-B 6 month Physical Well-Being Subscalep-value: 0.8295% CI: [-1.15, 1.45]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: Data below is for the Fact-B 12 month Physical Well-Being Subscalep-value: 0.8495% CI: [-1.41, 1.15]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is for the Fact-B 3 month Social/Family Well-Being Subscalep-value: 0.7795% CI: [-1.31, 0.96]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is for the Fact-B 6 month Social/Family Well-Being Subscalep-value: 0.4295% CI: [-1.91, 0.79]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is for the Fact-B 12 month Social/Family Well-Being Subscalep-value: 0.995% CI: [-1.41, 1.24]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is for the Fact-B 3 month Emotional Well-Being Subscalep-value: 0.995% CI: [-0.76, 0.87]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is for the Fact B 6 month Emotional Well-Being Subscalep-value: 0.2595% CI: [-0.4, 1.56]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is for the Fact-B 12 month Emotional Well-Being Subscalep-value: 0.2295% CI: [-0.36, 1.57]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is for Fact-B 3 month Functional Well-Being Subscalep-value: 0.8195% CI: [-1.05, 1.34]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is for Fact-B 6 month Functional Well-Being Subscalep-value: 0.4595% CI: [-0.85, 1.94]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is for the Fact-B 12 month Functional Well-Being Subscalep-value: 0.8795% CI: [-1.48, 1.26]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is for the Fact-B 3 month Breast Cancer Subscalep-value: 0.895% CI: [-1.13, 1.45]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is for the Fact-B 6 month Breast Cancer Subscalep-value: 0.3595% CI: [-0.79, 2.24]Mixed Models Analysis
Comparison: The data below is for the Fact-B 12 month Breast Cancer Subscalep-value: 0.4295% CI: [-0.88, 2.09]Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Number of Patients With Oncology Visit

Between group comparison of number of visits to oncology. Restricted to patients with at least 100 days of follow-up. Covariates included in multivariable models were age, Charlson's comorbidity index, race/ethnicity, marital status, and cancer stage.

Time frame: 18 months

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Distress ScreeningNumber of Patients With Oncology Visit728 Participants
No ScreeningNumber of Patients With Oncology Visit683 Participants
p-value: 0.00695% CI: [0.77, 0.96]Regression, Poisson
Secondary

Number of Patients With Primary Care Visit

Between group comparison of number of visits to primary care. Restricted to patients with at least 100 days of follow-up. Covariates included in multivariable models were age, Charlson's comorbidity index, race/ethnicity, marital status, and cancer stage.

Time frame: 18 months

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Distress ScreeningNumber of Patients With Primary Care Visit648 Participants
No ScreeningNumber of Patients With Primary Care Visit616 Participants
p-value: 0.35695% CI: [0.93, 1.07]Regression, Poisson
Other Pre-specified

Number of Participants Utilizing Behavioral Health Services

Between group comparison of number of visits with behavioral health providers. Restricted to patients with at least 100 days of follow-up. Covariates included in multivariable models were age, Charlson's comorbidity index, race/ethnicity, marital status, and cancer stage.

Time frame: 18 months

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Distress ScreeningNumber of Participants Utilizing Behavioral Health Services287 Participants
No ScreeningNumber of Participants Utilizing Behavioral Health Services247 Participants
p-value: 0.91995% CI: [0.73, 1.41]Regression/Poisson
Other Pre-specified

Number of Participants Utilizing Emergency and Urgent Care Services

Between group comparison of number of visits to emergency and urgent care services. Restricted to patients with at least 100 days of follow-up. Covariates included in multivariable models were age, Charlson's comorbidity index, race/ethnicity, marital status, and cancer stage.

Time frame: 18 months

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Distress ScreeningNumber of Participants Utilizing Emergency and Urgent Care ServicesED Visits248 Participants
Distress ScreeningNumber of Participants Utilizing Emergency and Urgent Care ServicesUrgent Care Visits269 Participants
No ScreeningNumber of Participants Utilizing Emergency and Urgent Care ServicesED Visits213 Participants
No ScreeningNumber of Participants Utilizing Emergency and Urgent Care ServicesUrgent Care Visits279 Participants
Comparison: The data below applies to Emergency Department visitsp-value: 0.36795% CI: [0.84, 1.62]Regression, Poisson
Comparison: The data below applies to Urgent Care visitsp-value: 0.49795% CI: [0.51, 1.38]Regression, Poisson

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 20, 2026